To the Forum :-
The explanation of the colours of the rainbow was first given by Isaac
Newton c1667 - its curved appearance
having been correctly explained c1611. A rainbow is seen by an observer
with his back to the sun when a
shower of water droplets is illuminated by the sun's rays. The formation
of a rainbow thus provides clear
evidence of rain.
The Scriptures first mention this "bow in the clouds" in Gen.9:13 where
- following the Flood - it is described
as "a token of the covenant between me (God) and the earth" - a
perpetual reminder of His promise never
again to destroy all flesh that is upon the earth by water. What is
surely implied here is, (a) the rainbow
was a _novelty_ and therefore, (b) untill the Flood, the Antediluvians
had never known _rain_.
These far-reaching conclusions are supported by Gen.2:5,6 where we read,
"...the Lord God had not caused it
to rain upon the earth...but there went up a mist from the earth and
watered the whole face of the ground."
[Quoting Henry Morris (The Genesis Record, p.84): "The original
hydrologic system was thus drastically
different from that of the present day."]
Here, then, is a further hurdle for those who wish to turn the literal
truth of these early chapters of Genesis
on its head. If the rainbow had been a familiar sight to Noah during his
long years before the deluge, where
was the logic and fitness of God's using it 'second-hand' as a token of
the covenant?
Sincerely,
Vernon
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jul 03 2002 - 18:09:46 EDT